Author
Topic: Do you still love 24-105L? (Read 17554 times)

It's good for what it is. I never loved it and always regretted not buying the original 24-70 instead when it was still available and only very little extra money. The results are certainly more than "good enough" but I never liked the f/4 limitation which makes it actually not a versatile lens for my preferences. I rarely ever leave the house with just the 24-105. It's good for studio style portraits though or anything else where you'd stop down anyway.

I was so happy to replace my old sigma 24-70 (2003 model, heavy as a 6 pack of beer) with the canon 24-105. The 24-105 was lighter to carry everywhere. But now the picture quality is not what I'm looking for. After years with it, I found its not as sharp as it can be. It works really well when I'm outside with good light. Not as well indoors without flash.

Now I'm saving for the 24-70 2.8 for replacement and will sell the 24-105.

It's good for what it is. I never loved it and always regretted not buying the original 24-70 instead when it was still available and only very little extra money. The results are certainly more than "good enough" but I never liked the f/4 limitation which makes it actually not a versatile lens for my preferences. I rarely ever leave the house with just the 24-105. It's good for studio style portraits though or anything else where you'd stop down anyway.

+1 My sentiments exactly, for the same reasons. I've said in several posts on CR that I like it but I don't love it. It's the only lens I have that I don't love...

I decided today that mine is going up for sale. I just don't use it near enough. Hmm, I think I've only locked it on my body 3 times... 24-70mm is definitely in my immediate future... Hmm, May even be willing to give that new Tammi a try...

For me the 24-105 is a sharp lens (at least my copy) that has an extremely useful focal length. The downside is that the aperture (DOF) and distortion at 24mm (which is noticeable with architectural shots even with correction in LR).

I tend to shoot longer focal lengths, so the new 24-70mm doesn't really make sense for me. Instead I have stuck with the 24-105mm and a set of prime lenses for when I want something more specific.

These days I tend to avoid shooting with the 24-105mm. Yet when I do, I usually really like the results. Maybe I should use it more...

Quote

The downside is that the aperture (DOF) and distortion at 24mm (which is noticeable with architectural shots even with correction in LR).

The new LR 5 beta has an adjustment tool for that, which with my testing seems to work pretty decent and quickly. DxO is another great option but if your using LR and can make the adjustments there, then why not... try out the LR 5 beta and see what you think, the tool is under the Lens Corrections tab, under "basic"

I was so happy to replace my old sigma 24-70 (2003 model, heavy as a 6 pack of beer) with the canon 24-105. The 24-105 was lighter to carry everywhere. But now the picture quality is not what I'm looking for. After years with it, I found its not as sharp as it can be. It works really well when I'm outside with good light. Not as well indoors without flash.

Now I'm saving for the 24-70 2.8 for replacement and will sell the 24-105.

Could be time for a quick MFA adjustment and perhaps it will be back to sharp as always! Sounds like it's been a great lens for you, that might just do the trick!

Thank you for your input. Seems like the general sentiment is the same as how I feel-it is useful sometimes but there's no wow factor. Im leaning toward selling it. If I could sell it near the price I paid I probably wouldn't even be hesitating at all.....

Thank you for your input. Seems like the general sentiment is the same as how I feel-it is useful sometimes but there's no wow factor. Im leaning toward selling it. If I could sell it near the price I paid I probably wouldn't even be hesitating at all.....

I have zero interest in 24-105. I just wonder...what much you paid for it? and how much you want for it?